IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ris/vhsuwp/2021_195.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Impact of the More Economic Approach on EU Merger Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Bernhardt, Lea

    (Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg)

  • Dewenter, Ralf

    (Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg)

Abstract

This paper analyses all final merger decisions by the European Commission from the beginning of 1990 up to the end of 2019. We use a novel dataset, containing information about 6245 merger cases from all economic sectors and combining all sorts of decisions, inclusive of withdrawn and prohibited cases. Using text analyses techniques, we first analyse merger decisions documents in order to find trends and differences in language and wording with respect to the 2004 regulation. As a result, we find a shift in favour of terms associated with the More Economic Approach. On the contrary, the concept of dominance has decreased since 2004, indicating a strong decline in structural market parameters for merger reviews. While the tonality is found to be largely positive (especially for cleared cases), again, a change under different merger regimes seems to be evident. Second, accounting for differences in the usage of competition-related terms and by using simple OLS and logit regressions, we find that the duration of the merger review has increased significantly after the 2004 reform. At the same time, the probability of a merger being prohibited has not changed significantly.

Suggested Citation

  • Bernhardt, Lea & Dewenter, Ralf, 2022. "The Impact of the More Economic Approach on EU Merger Decisions," Working Paper 195/2021, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:vhsuwp:2021_195
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.hsu-hh.de/fgvwl/wp-content/uploads/sites/572/2022/06/WP195.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arndt Christiansen & Wolfgang Kerber, 2006. "Competition Policy With Optimally Differentiated Rules Instead Of “Per Se Rules Vs Rule Of Reason”," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 215-244.
    2. Federico Mini, 2018. "Fifty is the New Forty: EU Merger Policy Permits Higher Market Shares After the 2004 Reform," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 53(3), pages 535-561, November.
    3. Neven, Damien J. & Roller, Lars-Hendrik, 2005. "Consumer surplus vs. welfare standard in a political economy model of merger control," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 829-848, December.
    4. Bruce R. Lyons, 2004. "Reform of European Merger Policy," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(2), pages 246-261, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Affeldt, Pauline & Duso, Tomaso & Szücs, Florian, 2021. "25 years of European merger control," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    2. Marie Goppelsroeder & Maarten Pieter Schinkel & Jan Tuinstra, 2008. "Quantifying The Scope For Efficiency Defense In Merger Control: The Werden‐Froeb‐Index," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 778-808, December.
    3. Duso, Tomaso & Gugler, Klaus & Yurtoglu, Burcin B., 2011. "How effective is European merger control?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(7), pages 980-1006.
    4. Tomaso Duso & Klaus Gugler & Burcin Yurtoglu, 2005. "EU Merger Remedies: A Preliminary Empirical Assessment," CIG Working Papers SP II 2005-16, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
    5. Budzinski, Oliver & Haucap, Justus, 2019. "Kartellrecht und Ökonomik: Institutions matter!," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 102, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    6. Lang, Matthias, 2017. "Legal uncertainty as a welfare enhancing screen," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 274-289.
    7. Schmidtchen, Dieter, 2006. "Wettbewerbsschutz durch regelgeleitete Wettbewerbspolitik: Anmerkungen zum institutionenökonomisch-evolutionären Wettbewerbsleitbild," CSLE Discussion Paper Series 2006-10, Saarland University, CSLE - Center for the Study of Law and Economics.
    8. Tomaso Duso & Klaus Gugler & Florian Szücs, 2013. "An Empirical Assessment of the 2004 EU Merger Policy Reform," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 123(11), pages 596-619, November.
    9. Haucap, Justus, 2010. "Eingeschränkte Rationalität in der Wettbewerbsökonomie," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 08, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    10. Jarig Sinderen & Ron Kemp, 2008. "The Economic Effect Of Competition Law Enforcement: The Case Of The Netherlands," De Economist, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 365-385, December.
    11. Christiansen, Arndt, 2005. "Der "more economic approach" in der EU-Fusionskontrolle - eine kritische Würdigung," Research Notes 21, Deutsche Bank Research.
    12. Bojan Ristić & Dejan Trifunović, 2014. "Horizontal Mergers And Weak And Strong Competition Commissions," Economic Annals, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Belgrade, vol. 59(202), pages 69-106, July – Se.
    13. Pauline Affeldt, 2019. "EU Merger Policy Predictability Using Random Forests," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1800, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    14. Jovanovic, Dragan & Wey, Christian, 2012. "An equilibrium analysis of efficiency gains from mergers," DICE Discussion Papers 64, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    15. Andrei Medvedev, 2004. "Efficiency Defense and Administrative Fuzziness in Merger Regulation," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp234, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    16. Patrice Bougette & Stéphane Turolla, 2006. "Merger Remedies at the European Commission: A Multinomial Logit Analysis," Working Papers 06-08, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Feb 2008.
    17. Barros, Pedro P. & Clougherty, Joseph A. & Seldeslachts, Jo, 2013. "Europeanization of EU member-state competition policy: The commission's leadership role," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 41-51.
    18. Steffen Huck & Kai A. Konrad, 2004. "Merger Profitability and Trade Policy," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 106(1), pages 107-122, March.
    19. Jie Li & Jing Lu & Mobing Jiang, 2017. "Political Economy Model of Cross-Border Mergers Under Mixed Oligopoly," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 83-100, February.
    20. Cosnita, Andreea & Tropeano, Jean-Philippe, 2009. "Negotiating remedies: Revealing the merger efficiency gains," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 188-196, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Merger policy; Competition policy; Regulatory reform; EU Commission;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ris:vhsuwp:2021_195. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Klaus Bekcmann (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/egbwhde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.